California Open Carry Ban

This is a discussion on California Open Carry Ban within the Open Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by nicklikesHK
Honestly, I feel its a lost cause, I was hoping someone was doing something so I could try to help, but ...

Honestly, I feel its a lost cause, I was hoping someone was doing something so I could try to help, but since it is not coming back, I think I will move to Arizona. Been planning on it for a while now anyways

We’re happy to have gun totin folks from the Republik, just leave all the gun haters behind.

I don't see any open carry in Reno though it is legal. A CCW requires a class, test, background check and $125 with the sherrif's application. Many people I know have CCW's. We have a lot of California businesses and people moving here because of the tax laws and no income tax. The high desert is different. We are at a little over 5000' north of town.

When is this supposed to take place? Years from now? Or is this something that will be heard by the courts soon?

Originally Posted by CRTC

I have a Federal lawsuit seeking to overturn California's 1967 ban on Loaded Open Carry. My website -> California Right To Carry

My lawsuit is opposed by all of the so called gun-rights groups which think that somehow a ban on Loaded Open Carry means that the Federal Courts will make California "shall issue" when it comes to concealed carry permits. There is no precedent to support that argument anywhere on any topic, let alone one involving the Second Amendment. Courts will go out of there way to avoid a constitutional question. No Federal judge is going to invent a new form of jurisprudence just to please the NRA/CRPA/SAF/CalGuns.

The NRA/CRPA and SAF/CalGuns both brought Federal separate lawsuits seeking shall-issue concealed carry permits in California and lost in Federal District Court. Both cases are now on appeal before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Net lawyers should take note that the NRA/CRPA lawsuit explicitly failed to challenge ANY California statute. Their argument is that the 9th should make concealed carry shall issue in order to prevent the overturning of California's ban on Loaded Open Carry as well as the California Gun Free School Zone Act of 1995. The NRA/CRPA opening brief to the 9th says that would be "drastic."

Something to keep in mind the next time the NRA/CRPA asks for money to fight California's Open Carry bans.

Likewise, the SAF/CalGuns attorney (Alan Gura) spent so much time arguing that the US Supreme Court really didn't mean what it said in Heller about longstanding prohibitions on concealed carry and that California can ban Open Carry if it wants to, he forgot to state exactly what (if any) constitutional challenge he was bringing. The Federal District Court judge inferred a "Facial Challenge" and ruled against Gura. Facial challenges are almost impossible to win and since Gura did not raise what is known as an "As Applied" challenge at the trial court, he can't raise it at the Appellate Court.

Gura's defenders say that is all part of his strategy. To win by losing. In the four years since the Heller decision the US Supreme Court has not heard a single case involving concealed carry, nor will they.

Gene Hoffman, the Chairman of CalGuns, has been the most vocal critic of Open Carry in the State of California.

My Federal lawsuit, on the other hand, is arguing that the US Supreme Court meant exactly what it said in both the Heller and McDonald decisions. I seek to overturn California's ban on openly carrying a loaded firearm and California's law against carrying a loaded firearm (openly or concealed) while travelling.

Given that I have three US Supreme Court precedents and California Supreme Court precedents going back to 1891 saying that Open Carry is the lawful manner of carrying a firearm in public, I'm fairly confident of winning my case on Appeal when it reaches the 9th (stare decisis).

The best that the NRA/CRPA/SAF/CalGuns can hope for is a remand back to the District courts for a do-over.

I don't see any open carry in Reno though it is legal. A CCW requires a class, test, background check and $125 with the sherrif's application. Many people I know have CCW's. We have a lot of California businesses and people moving here because of the tax laws and no income tax. The high desert is different. We are at a little over 5000' north of town.

If you can get a CCW, why would you want to OC? The problem came about by people protesting their inability to get a CCW, so they made a well-publicized spectacle and ruined it for smart OCers.

When is this supposed to take place? Years from now? Or is this something that will be heard by the courts soon?

I am waiting for the Federal Magistrate Judge to write her report and recommendation to the Federal District Court judge which is due any day now. I originally brought my lawsuit pro se, filed a First Amended Complaint to include a challenge to California's handgun open carry licensing law (licenses are only available in counties with a population of fewer than 200,000 persons and are valid only in those counties) waited for the Defendants to file their motions to dismiss and then brought in a lawyer to represent me (my lawyer wrote and filed the oppositions to their motions to dismiss).

The Attorney General of California now has her knickers all in a twist arguing that I don't have standing because it was the City of Redondo Beach who enforced the state statute on me and the City of Redondo Beach is charging me with violating their local ordinance which bans all uses, all weapons, all carrying and all transportation of weapons in open spaces within the city limits in an effort to have that portion of my lawsuit (challenging their municipal gun ban) removed to state court.

Given that both Federal judges in my lawsuit had previously concluded that the city of Redondo Beach is preempted by state law from enacting its own ordinances regulating the carrying of firearms, the magistrate judge's report and recommendation to the district court judge should make for an interesting read.

The short answer is I will likely have my case before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in a few months.

I am hopeful that the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals will have rendered a favorable decision in the challenge to the various Illinois statutes which includes a challenge to a state statute identical to the one I am challenging in my lawsuit (a crime to carry a loaded firearm in incorporated cities, towns and villages).

Unlike the NRA/CRPA/SAF/CalGuns I am explicitly making both a facial and an as-applied challenge to the state statutes.

The link you posted takes one to a website to CalGuns/NRA/CRPA. These groups have separate federal lawsuits pending before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals where they are arguing to uphold California's 1967 ban on Loaded Open Carry.

This is one of the many reasons I left the Soviet Socialist State of Kalifornia years ago. Glad to be living in a state that supports citizen carry. Best of luck to you. I worked at Criterion Catalyst in Bay Point for many years and we always heard shots and sirens.

some of it has to do with comfort, a nice OWB holster and having your shirt cover it is fine and dandy but once your shirt slides up and someone sees your gun you're in trouble.

I have a few CBST holsters and they are comfortable but nothing like a quality owb holster and the smell of freedom as I exercise my right to bear arms.

I just got an OWB holster from crossbreed a few days ago. I mostly just use it when I'm workin on the range (RSO) but depending on the shirt I'm wearing I'll use it to conceal as well. You can't deny the comfort man...